Pakistan Travelogue II

H V HODSON on League leadership`s intention:

16th August as the ``Direct action Day. On that day meetings would be held all over India to explain the league`s resolution. These meetings and processions passed off- as was manifestly the central league leaders` intention- without more than commonplace and limited disturbances, with one tragic exception.

Page 166 The Great Divide by H V Hodson

H V Hodson was the constitutional advisor of the Viceroy....

Re: # 649

Jinnah condemned Violence in Calcutta the very next day in a press statement issued from the League high command. What you forget it is that CONGRESS was carrying out violence in Calcutta... not the Muslim League which was on the receiving end.

Had you taken this to court you would have been laughed out, because all statements as well as an incriminating evidence points to the Congress Party.

Re: # 649

The point my dear friend is that .... the Congress, it is clear, deliberately created violence in Calcutta to blame the League (Which had a ministry there)... and it worked... Congress was asked to form a central government ... Sardar Patel`s letter proves this.

The question remains that if Direct Action Day violence was the aim...Why the ML chose Bengal for violence where blame could have been easily placed on the ML.?

The best options were to choose Delhi or Lahore, where the ML could have easily blamed the violence on the Non Muslim League govts and the ML had the Muscles to incite a violent demo.

It is quite clear that the aim of the Calcutta violence was to propel the Congress Party to power in the center.

Re: # 647

No my dear friend.... Margaret Burkwhite was an old Gandhi associate .... btw not even she dares to blame Jinnah.... how else does she describe him as free from bias then? Have you read her account in detail? Rsidhar is only selectively quoting and then putting ``my comments`` to give them a deliberate tinge...

Now compare this photojournalist to the historians you condemn as ``Pro-Jinnah``

Ainslee Embree: A respected American historian from Columbia University. Author of the Volume 1 of ``Sources in Indian History`` accepted to be the most authentic source book on Indian History.

H M Seervai Advocate Indian Supreme Court. Advocate General Maharashtra. His book on Cosntitutional law is considered to be the foremost authority

Wolpert: An American and an outright avowed admirer of Gandhi. Wrote more books on Indian politicians than on Pakistani politicians.

Re: # 646

Sir you are not clear on the question...

Jinnah did a number of things to stop violence.... he issued a very clear and direct call for Muslims to Not indulge in a direct action of their choice but rather follow the League directive of civil disobedience... I`ve already given you the exact quote and you`ve acknowledged it.

This order was followed to the hilt by the Muslims.... in Calcutta it was sabotaged by the Congress Party... and you have Sardar Patel on the record gloating about it.... You can check it from Sumit Sarkar`s book ``Modern India 1947`` page 42 I believe...


As for Congress and Maurading Hindu population... it is a fact. Please refer to post 621 ...
Wavell to Pethick Lawrence Transfer of Power Papers page 879 volume 9


The violence did rage for a week.... Jinnah condemned it on several occasions during this period. But the violence continued from the Hindu side.... as is obvious from a simple reading of PRIMARY SOURCES....

#648 by Mantolives

I asked for a statement from Jinnah, because only that would be an indicator of whether he was sincere in wanting the violence to end. Does Sardar Patel`s letter prove Jinnah`s intentions? I thought for a lawyer, it would have been easy for you to understand. Looks like I`m mistaken.

And it was not as if the violence was over in a flash. It raged for more than a week, so Jinnah had ample time to assess the situation and act accordingly. It would have taken less than a minute for him to make the statement and less than a day to pass on to the Muslims in Calcutta. That he chose not to do so reveals a more devious side to that upright and no-nonsense countenance that he sought to project in public.

[The biggest Proof of this is a letter by Sardar Patel... quoted by Sumit Sarkar in his book .... where Sardar Patel is gloating over the fact that more Muslims died than Hindus in Calcutta]

The call to the Direct Action Day was given by the Muslim League, more specifically, Jinnah. So the responsibility for the desirable as well as undesirable consequences lay with Jinnah and his Leaguers. So what`s the point here?

Re: # 645

The biggest Proof of this is a letter by Sardar Patel... quoted by Sumit Sarkar in his book .... where Sardar Patel is gloating over the fact that more Muslims died than Hindus in Calcutta

Sardar Patel was Gandhi`s no3 right?

#644 by Mantolives

[Margaret Burkewhite was always a pro-Gandhi reporter and never a historian... ]

So what? Does that make her any less truthful? Do we then cast aspersions on Wolpert, Seervai, and Embree, whom you love to quote, as pro-Jinnah?

#645 by Mantolives

[BTW Your question is as usual wrong.]

Another 3 posts and still no answer as to what Jinnah did to stop Muslims from indulging in violence. Whatever happened to the authentic sources you said you`d quote from? Or did even the authentic sources find it impossible to defend Jinnah?

[As proved above the ``MARAUDING POPULATON`` was ``HINDU`` and ``CONGRESS PARTY``... which attacked the Muslims returning from public meetings.]

Proved where? And proved by whom?

[Jinnah was in any event in Delhi and not Calcutta....]

And so was Gandhi. But that didn`t stop Gandhi from going to Noakhali at great risk to his life, touring and staying in the riot-affected areas.

[This was a clever scheme by Congress Party to taint Muslim League with violence...]

As you said, perhaps in your head.

Look, I think you are just prolonging this debate by writing nonsensical posts. My contention is simple. Jinnah did nothing to stop the violence that erupted as a result of his call to Direct Action Day. The riots raged for over a week, but not a single statement in that period from Jinnah asking Muslims to desist from indulging in violence. Do you have evidence to prove otherwise? If yes, post it without resorting to tenuous alibis. If no, just accept it. End of the matter.

Re: # 642

BTW Your question is as usual wrong. As proved above the ``MARAUDING POPULATON`` was ``HINDU`` and ``CONGRESS PARTY``... which attacked the Muslims returning from public meetings.

Jinnah was in any event in Delhi and not Calcutta....

This was a clever scheme by Congress Party to taint Muslim League with violence...

Re: # 638

Had you been reading some books... instead of making these websites and sensationalist journalism you would know otherwise... Margaret Burkewhite was always a pro-Gandhi reporter and never a historian... It is her version... what is amazing is that she is forced to say on several occasions that Jinnah was free of bias.

You`ve selectively quoted the speech. Jinnah said that both the ``British and Congress had held a gun to our head. British as rulers and Congress with their threat of civil disobedience. We bid good bye to constitutional ways and means``.

Unconstitutional to Jinnah`s mind was Gandhi and his movement. Were the violent.


No Indian has answered the following questions:

1) Why WAS direct action day peaceful all over India except Calcutta, which I`ve shown damaged the Muslim League and gave the British a reason to give Congress the ministry at the center ?

2) Why HASN`T any real Historian (and even people like Lapierre and Collins who wrote that horrible book ``Freedom at Midnight``) including many Indian ones put the blame on Jinnah


The fact of the matter is that you people love to distort history ... to suit it to your own liking....

-YLH

Re: # 642

No actually it is not.... it is in your head.

# Various by Mantolives

21 posts by you since you said you`d come up with some authentic sources that would prove that Jinnah did try to restrain the marauding Muslim population of Calcutta. You haven`t. If someone as well read on Jinnah as you can`t come up with some clinching evidence, there can`t be a more damning indictment of Jinnah.

Re: # 619,We didn`t take them prisoner in as much as they had a ``repatriation malfunction``. OK?

Now tell us about Gandhi`s role, if any, in East Pakistan/`71.

Re: # 635

Oooops not intended for here....

sorry Dullah

Re: # 630

A stupid question...

No Jinnah didn`t go to Calcutta in August 1946... just as Gandhi didn`t ... or Nehru didn`t... They were busy hammering out the issue of interim government in 1946

Did Gandhi go to Calcutta in August 1946? No he didn`t... unlike Jinnah who was bed ridden on several occasions, Gandhi could have but he didn`t.

And later on ... Jinnah as I pointed out visited several different riot affected areas... just like Gandhi did...

So I don`t get the point you are trying to make.